From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 18 16:39:25 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 617BC106566B; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:39:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com) Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C550D8FC4D; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:39:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 4so360916eyf.9 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:39:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vpURFgMedtZlQrIu+biU6bCZ1PLcLli7xT1qLPIrLu8=; b=giIaWsv3lC6EQygpwVC3/UD9fuK3JgrB5uTU3zlnKJXkyRa+xO1l76uQeWjMzmHLM7 uDx92F69EHd+bCeYU3ZJFbwYwe2Qi/mi2G/VWkFcM6lX6mdskCicszGaj9vOtQAS9YD+ 5OXjK9Z5Y+h9yeHR/lootsrSTiwULcoLu6CKA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=LZNQiOpOE5YfNtJq4A3UCLaP4BZfL8rv4fR/rnEVSKKSUog/Ab0HWvdvu8SJev9zyQ W2basFmLmjvVt29oqSCsRAuavKZ6qqCLLvf3Zm2lgg8nybxJxVncQLNIt0H5FQ/t5PnS dKbxVDTgp/dIlaO3bxXPzFaxU9C8azUgGGBB8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.2.213 with SMTP id 63mr527739wef.207.1253291963615; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:39:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4AAB017D.7090909@delphij.net> References: <4AAB017D.7090909@delphij.net> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:39:23 +0000 Message-ID: From: "b. f." To: d@delphij.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, delphij@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vesa(4) and amd64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:39:25 -0000 On 9/12/09, Xin LI wrote: > > b. f. wrote: >> After the recent x86emu/vesa/dpms commits, I'm now able to use some >> more graphics modes with syscons on amd64. That's good. Not so good >> is the fact that my HP Pavilion desktop running 9-CURRENT i386 r197085 >> with >> >> devic sc >> options SC_PIXEL_MODE >> device vga >> options VGA_WIDTH90 >> >> in the kernel and agp, dpms, x86emu, and vesa loaded as kernel modules >> can no longer use the 132x60 mode that had been my default syscons >> mode, and now yields a blank screen. Even worse is the fact that my >> Toshiba laptop, with nearly the same configuration, locks up with a >> screen full of zeroes every time I load the new vesa kernel module, >> when formerly it had no such problem. Other than simplifying the >> organization of the code, is there any advantage to be gained from >> forcing those platforms that are capable of native vesa to use x86emu? >> Because up to this point there are serious disadvantages to doing so. > > I think it was caused by some unrelated change. ddkprog@ has proposed a > change, here is a slightly modified one, could you please give it a try? > I'll try to see if I can have some clue myself tonight. > With your suggested change on 9-CURRENT i386 r197299, my desktop can now use the 132x60 mode, and some other modes that were causing problems after the x86emu introduction. Also, mode-switching no longer forces a reboot. There remain some problems with vesa/dpms when attempting to wake up from a sleep state, but these may be acpi or hardware problems. However, with 9-CURRENT i386 r197295 and your patch, my laptop still hangs after displaying the VESA information block when attempting to load the vesa kernel module. Regards, b.